Messages

1

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 18, 2019, 05:57:22 AM »

Considering that Model S and X still use 18650 batteries made in japan by Panasonic, and the ample space remaining in Giga1, I can see how Tesla could set up their own battery factory while still buying every 18650 and 2170 Panasonic can make.

Except that Panasonic has recently pulled back plans to expand operations due to Tesla's current inability to buy enough due to lack of demand (or if you believe bulls...I dunno, transportation hell or something).

The bear in me says they will integrate Maxwell technology into Panasonic's line making it faster, thus making the batteries cheaper, with a likely increase in durability.

Ask a bear for the bear take. You can't muster a genuine bear thought. I promise.

Tesla bought Maxwell because Maxwell was going BK and would agree to almost any terms. Tesla wanted their cash on hand and the narrative that maybe there is some amazing tech. This staves off Tesla BK and helps keep Musk from his margin-call. Tesla only had pay with (soon to be worthless) stock. That's a bear take.

2

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 18, 2019, 04:03:17 AM »

I talked about our ability to eliminate fossil fuels in 20 years by roughly doubling the progress we've made in previous years.  At the end I should have typed 2040 but messed up and typed 2020.

I'm sure you recognized my mistake for what it was.

Fair enough. I did.

Too tempting to point out how optimistic your error was (considering I find all your other comments to be in the same vein).

Alas, you seem a good fellow, who simply seems to see things differently than me, while not being totally deranged by Cultist Hopium, so I'll try to avoid disparaging comments in the future...


So, I am totally committed and on board for changing the world to be 90% plus off of fossil fuels in the next 2 decades...BUT I don't think it is possible with the same sort of lifestyle the 1st world currently lives. You seem to disagree and believe there are like-for-like substitutes which can make (for example: CARS) effectively "green". I do not hold this belief.  I would love to, in good faith, discuss this.

To establish a mutual level of understanding: what is your personal familiarity with manufacturing, mining, transportation, fluid transportation, industry at large, etc?


(for those who claim this is off topic: tesla's "glory" (at least on ASIF) is about its ability to aid humanity in removing itself for activities which increase GHG levels. thus, if you don't understand how this is germane, shut up and let the adults converse)

3

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 18, 2019, 03:53:04 AM »

GSY, can you cite a source for any of your statements?

Can you cite a source for this question? Or the premise on which it is based? Or how about telling me what you are referring to, rather than just a nonsensical blanket question! Ah, but then I could just answer, and you'd look stupid for asking.


Here is a statement:

1+1=2 ,  and Tesla is totally going BK.  (both unsourced)

4

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 18, 2019, 03:45:29 AM »

Per news reports, there have been ~20 Tesla fires

Two of those fires were in the very early days when Tesla Ss ran over large metal objects in the road and punctured their battery packs.  After those two events Tesla added a shield under the packs and I haven't heard of another fire starting that way.

The other 90%, irrelevant!

5

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 18, 2019, 03:43:21 AM »

There's no need for a drying room.  That could open up space at Reno for some vehicle manufacturing.

Bro, most of the Giga is totally empty. It is, at most, 1/3 used. But I do see awesome it will be to eliminate the drying room. Drying is difficult in Nevada. Not enough space. Too much moisture. #NevadaProblems

6

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 17, 2019, 08:01:54 AM »

BTW, before you tell us that EVs are too expensive do you realize that if you bought a Tesla Model 3  or a Toyota Camry V6 that your monthly out of pocket expenses would be just about the same during a five year loan payoff?  Long range luxury EVs are already price competitive with <luxury sedans.

lol. The Camry will last 200k miles. The Tesla would last half that, at best. Computer on wheels! Risk of burning to death is also much less in a Camry. But it isn't as trendy. Trade-offs.

7

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 17, 2019, 07:57:09 AM »

We wouldn't even need to double our generation efforts to achieve a 100% RE electricity supply by 2020.

I'm super curious what year you are currently living in.

8

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 14, 2019, 07:31:32 AM »

OK, what did I miss?  What step absolutely requires fossil fuel?

If you think mining can be done with solar, then nothing. I take it you have never worked in serious industry.

Your list of things that can theoretically be done without fossil fuels is similar to list of what is necessary to live on Mars. Creating the check list isn't too tough. Doing it is nearly impossible, and totally impossible in the time frame necessary to avert disaster.

9

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 12, 2019, 06:10:30 AM »

Abundant, cheap energy is the foundation of everything in a first world lifestyle. It doesn't matter if it comes from dead dinosaurs (solar energy of the past) or directly from the sun.

The energy that comes directly from the sun is super diffuse. The only way to capture it effectively for electricity is with a panel manufactured with fossil fuels every step of the way. There is no self contained solar manufacturing plant that produces its own energy and materials. It isn't possible.

Independence from what?

Energy independence. If a man's home is his castle, energy independence is his castle's walls. Once your castle is energy independent, water independence and food independence follows. The more energy, food and water independent people we have in the world, the more resilient we are as a species.

I hope you can see the role Tesla plays. They are the tip of the spear toward the transition to emissions free transportation and a solar powered world. However, if the transition is not made in time, the energy independence batteries provide can serve as a life boat for people that become energy independent before the industrial capacity of modern civilization is lost to climate chaos.

Wow. You really don't get it. I ask, "Independence from what," and you answer, "energy independence." Yikes.

All that aside...Even if you had solar panels and batteries and all the toys they power within your castle walls, you aren't even close to independent. Maybe for a few years. Everything breaks, and it breaks quite quickly. A decade is a good lifespan for most products. Solar panels might last more than a decade. A battery system possibly could. But everything they run has to be considered too.

Look at the warranty on most things! I sell pumps and they are all warrantied for 1 or 2 years. Some have 5 year warranties, but only for the components that don't break. But lets be crazy generous and say everything last 25 years. A person would have to go through 3 sets of everything in their life. All of these things are impossible to make without fossil fuels.

The idea that we can keep the same lifestyle but have companies make greener products and thus fix the systemic problems we face is crazy. It stems from intellectual laziness and a lack of real world experience with the way things are made and how a first world lifestyle is supported.

10

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 12, 2019, 05:54:15 AM »

- Production vs. profitability:  we could slow down and be more profitable, but we want to accelerate the adoption of sustainable transport.

Think about this: In Q1 Tesla gross profit was $565M while SGA was $704M. The car prices continue to get reduced. So they need to sell significantly more cars to have the same gross profit. Even if they do, they will still lose money. This has nothing to do with growth.

How on God's green earth do you Muskian Bulltards think they would make money by selling fewer cars? It is insane that Musk throws this out without bothering to explain it (especially considering it flies in the face of basic logic), and that his followers eat it up without a second thought because Musk claims it to help save the world...

11

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 12, 2019, 04:33:49 AM »

2019 Shareholder meeting.
My notes:

What was that old joke?

“So if we’re selling dollars for ninety-cents how do we make money?”

“Volume.”

12

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season

« on: June 12, 2019, 03:22:47 AM »

Wipneus describes Fram volume export as near normal for the month based on piomas data.

In volume yes. But the ice around greenland is much thinner than in years past, thus more area exports due to the ice structure's fragility, and the volume ends up about the same.

13

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 11, 2019, 05:00:54 AM »

Five months later ...

Nobody ever said you can't build a shell of a building in five months. Congratulations. Looks very Chinese. Which everyone know is synonymous with very green.

14

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 11, 2019, 04:37:11 AM »

LOL Tesla not making fertilizer, cement, and plastic makes them evil.

Except I never said that, and you totally (probably intentionally) missed the point. If you can't understand the argument that fossil fuels are the foundation of everything in a first world lifestyle, and that thus the lifestyle is what needs changing, you are totally lost. 

15

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 11, 2019, 04:35:16 AM »

Munro Teardown Shows Tesla Model 3 Solidly Profitable

Never has there ever been a genuine company's profitability analysis based on tearing one of there products apart. It's honestly pathetic. Imagine tearing into a block of cement to see if the cement manufacturer is profitable. Total Muskian cult nonsense.

16

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 10, 2019, 06:42:34 AM »

Or you can listen to Bill Gates explain it in 2 minutes.

https://twitter.com/dmichie66/status/1071847554650857472

"How are you going to make steel?...where's the fertilizer, cement, plastic, where's it going to come from?... There is no substitute for how the industrial economy runs..."

Tesla doesn't change that. Even if they could, they are not competent enough to execute.

The only thing that changes the paradigm is governments rewriting the rules to change the incentives that determine our lifestyles.

17

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 10, 2019, 05:54:41 AM »

FSD is an extremely interesting scientific challenge. The semi will change the equation on transportation and CO2. The roof tile is the logical solution to our need for abundant energy. Profitability is a great tool to create sustainable patterns. Factory automation is a never ending process.

-In Jan 2017, Musk said FSD would be ready in "3 months maybe, 6 months definitely." It has been 5 times longer than the "definitely". Nothing indicates the tech is closer today, despite having logged "billions of miles of data".

-Semi production was supposed to start this year, but obviously will not. I do agree that it would change the equation on transportation. The energy storage weighing 30% of the load vs 1% of the load is a big change. And the explosions will be epic.

-The roof tile does seem a logical solution to abundant energy. Over two year ago, Musk unveiled Tesla's* solar roof tile. (*It was ostensibly SolarCity's tech and thus provided cover for the nepotistic bail out.*) Tesla is installing approximating zero of these solar roofs today...because like everything else on this list, THE TECH IS FAKE.

-Musk has continuously claimed that Tesla will be "profitable from now on" since 2011. In the last 4 years, the closest they have come is losing 2/3 of a billion dollars. If it is such a great tool, it is a shame it isn't in Tesla's toolbox.

-The model 3 production line, was supposed to be the "alien dreadnought" of super autonomy. They ended up getting built by hand in a tent. Overall the Fremont factory employs more people per car than practically every other auto factory in the world (and it is in practically the highest labor cost area in the world, lol). Musk ended up admitting that 'WOW autonomy is hard and people do a lot of things better than machines.'

Tesla's attitude is what we need to stop climate change and change the world for better.

Nope. Tesla's attitude is Musk's attitude. And Musk's attitude is, "I want to be on the cover of Rolling Stone." He has succeeded by convincing non-geniuses that he is on a mission to save the world.

Even if Tesla fails it's mission people are safer from climate change by virtue of energy independence.

Independence from what? My guess is that you are saying independence from fossil fuels. But this is totally untrue. Teslas are made using tons of fossil fuel energy and even fossil fuels themselves. Every step of the manufacturing process requires fossil fuels and the batteries usually charge from electricity generated by fossil fuels. Even when the electricity does come from solar panels, the solar panels are made possible 100% thanks to fossil fuels (although it is quite likely a more efficient use of the fossil fuels than simply burning them to generate electricity).

Why are you opposed to this solution so vehemently?

Because it is a dead end solution that consumes tons of the passion and energy that could potentially go into REAL SOLUTIONS. It is an incredibly lazy idea that solution we need is to live basically the same way but just have someone else manufacture our lifestyle in a "green" way. NO. OMFG NO. We actually have to live drastically different lifestyles to have different outcomes. And person thousand kilo cars almost certainly play no role in that different lifestyle. Musk is a pathetically clear and obvious liar. Tesla has almost no chance of survival, and I find the entire ordeal distasteful...nah, APPALLING. The weak mindedness of those who see provenly fake tech as the solution, due to it's theoretical convenience and because of how in vogue it is to do so DISGUST ME. I wish that y'all were a different species, but alas you are not. And when I look in the mirror, I see a human who must at some level be capable of the same idiocy and my heart sinks.

Drops Mic

18

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 10, 2019, 05:04:24 AM »

Production machineries are setting up inside the GF3 China now. Possibly will have running test in August.

Well considering a lot of "definitely"s and "zero-doubt"s dates have passed years ago..I think a "possibly" might as well be translated as "in the next millennium, maybe".

19

Policy and solutions / Re: Space colonization

« on: June 10, 2019, 04:48:27 AM »

Moreover, there is simply no place on Earth where you can safely store huge amounts of carbon:

Um...Plants? 

This statement is so stupid that I cannot even......for...fear...of losing...my shit...and going totally...over the line...and...I...don't...want...to...be...abusive.

Thanks for getting to this before me. You managed to be least offensive than I possibly could have, and I don't want to be put back on moderation.


The great irony is that the carbon should go into soil and foliage, which are actually assets. It builds value to store carbon in this way and makes the earth's carrying capacity much greater. And it is the most basic human task. It is good for us...spiritually and physically healthy.

But apparently some people think it makes more sense to do something that has never been done. Not even close. Not even close to close. Likely bordering on impossible. Even if it could be done, it would be the least natural environment possible...akin to a prison.

20

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 08, 2019, 03:14:40 AM »

The Tesla lawnmower isn't real.

You should consider posting the same warning on posts about FSD, the Semi, the roof tile, profitability, factory autonomization, etc.

21

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season

« on: June 08, 2019, 03:10:42 AM »

The latest ECMWF forecast shows that high pressure domination is over...

Yes. I wonder if the worst weather for ice is long periods of high pressure followed by some cyclones to stir things up, and then back to high pressure, etc.

22

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season

« on: June 07, 2019, 03:16:06 PM »

The system moving north through the Lena River Basin looks set up to really do a number on Laptev Sea ice. The coastal temps should be in the mid 20s and the winds should be perfect for expanding the Laptev bite.

23

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 07, 2019, 02:06:41 AM »

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/06/04/teslas-going-to-have-to-restructure-says-blaine-capital.html

Tesla’s going to have to restructure, says Blaine Capital
Tesla is going to be “worthless” as far as the equity is concerned, says William Smith of Blaine Capital.

I mean duh, right.

"If you look at the product that Tesla is actually making now, this Model 3, it is absolute garbage. This is not the 'S' and it's not the 'X'.  That's the old Tesla. This new Tesla is being thrown together by hand in a tent. You can't go through a car wash. These things are blowing up all the time. The batteries are incinerating. It is not a quality product."

llol

"They have very poor management. Elon Musk is not a genius, he's not a visionary. He's a charlatan, he's a carnival barker. He can not replace any of the massive amounts of management that are leaving the company."

Not good when the mainstream media is catching onto the fact that the cult leader is a con artist.

24

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 06, 2019, 03:57:21 PM »

As you might know, VW just announced to finally build a (very tiny) gigafactory. They are about to invest 44 Billion. Do you expect them to 'make money' still?


Doesn't VW know that is cooler to build HUGE gigafactory, but only fill it up 1/3 of the way, Tesla-style.

Anyways,  $44B in CapEx won't change the income statement. That's not how it works. So yes, they would still make money. (The entire global auto sector is about to enter a recession and thus profits are unlikely, but building a factory has nothing to do with it.)

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/112814/does-capital-expenditure-capex-immediately-affect-income-statements.asp

To cite an example, if a flower shop owner purchases a delivery van for $30,000, that vehicle is recorded as an asset on the balance sheet that same year, but that year’s income statement remains unaffected by the purchase.


Yes, because they already did the necessary investments VW and others are still facing.


Nice idea, but totally wrong. VW spent $56B on CapEx during the last 3 years, while Tesla spent a little less $8B.


I actually went to business school. Did you?


I hope they didn't charge you. If they did, you should ask for your money back. Maybe you, Sig, Arch, and Neil all went to the same B school and can get together on a class action lawsuit. Hope your legal savvy exceeds your business knowledge.

25

Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company

« on: June 06, 2019, 03:31:16 PM »

risk of accidents, ride inconvenience, need for very costly development of control technology, and much more

Funny Oren, these are exactly the point that convinced me of the concept.

You couldn't do it with humans driving. That's for sure.

In which scenario could it actually be possible? It would require a closed, somewhat deterministic system with fast and updatable computers, accurate sensors, and interconnectivity.

Well, that's exactly what this is, isn't it?

No, it isn't. The sensors aren't accurate and there isn't interconnectivity.

26

Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company

« on: June 06, 2019, 07:34:45 AM »

https://www.inverse.com/article/56397-boring-company-subway-comparison

Elon Musk: Boring Co Loop "Will Crush" Subways in Throughput, Convenience

Musk may want to reconsider his tunnels being associating with "crush"ing. But hey, what can you expect from a bunch of total amateurs trying to drastically improve on a refined industrial process.

27

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 06, 2019, 07:14:46 AM »

.

Musk will fly us all to Mars, through a tunnel, on green fuel, harvested from a roof tile, on fully autonomous mode. And we will transform the land and the atmosphere and it will be easy.

It will not be easy.

Don't tell your hero. He says living therbe will e the easy part. And that there is a 70% chance he will move to Mars. I'm sure now that his cyborg tech was released 3 months ago it will change the whole dynamic. And once we have the battery tech necessary to enable the Semi to function, Mars life will be more realistic. We can live in tunnels, dug super cheap. And use the bricks from the tunneling to build surface structures. With solar roof tiles on top to power the fully self driving vehicles.

And of course the plan requires nuking the entire planet. This Musk guy seems legit. Not like an maniacal drug-addict cult-leading sociopath. Not at all.

28

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 06, 2019, 07:05:57 AM »

I have nothing to say.

Could you answer the question, please?

Why are you seeing tesla doomed and not the other carmaker in the graph Sigmetnow provided?

I save those comments for the VW glory/failure thread. Duh.


But fine. Fine. I'll answer this ridiculous assertion that Tesla is no different than other auto maker (specifically VW, BMW, and Diamler)...

All 3 of the other companies made money last year. And the year before. And the year before. (I have no idea where those charts from Sig come from...look up the numbers yourself).

Meanwhile, Tesla lost money every year. If you add up all 3 years, the other autos made $77 Billion in net income. Vs Tesla's LOSS of $3.5 Billion.

But don't worry, Tesla is losing money at an even quicker rate this year. So I'm sure the fundamentals are solid. Or mixed. Or whatever you want them to be.

29

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 06, 2019, 04:17:14 AM »

A Model X has already towed over 287,000 pounds, so....

hmmm. This guy must have 378,000 towing capacity. Muskian talk. Total nonsense.





What do you think the brakes necessary for a road approved 3,000,000 lb towing vehicle would be??? Oh, did I put an extra 0 in there...who cares, it is a totally made up number anyways. I understand that simpletons buy into this nonsense, but I would have liked to have thought that when they come across a place a knowledge (like a forum), they are able to drop their childish beliefs. Apparently not. Musk will fly us all to Mars, through a tunnel, on green fuel, harvested from a roof tile, on fully autonomous mode. And we will transform the land and the atmosphere and it will be easy.

30

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 05, 2019, 02:51:18 PM »

OTOH Tesla's products, existing and announced ones, are not fake and could have significant demand. It's just not clear if the demand and its rate of conversion to orders will be sufficient to support profitable operations, given high fixed costs, and considering the timelines for new products coming to market. The only product that I feel may not materialize is the full autonomy, not fake, but it could yet fail. It's an extremely difficult engineering problem.
The short-term challenge is surviving on mostly a single product (Model 3, with a bit of S/X and storage batteries thrown in) until the new major products (Y, Semi) arrive towards the end of 2020.

They literally are fake. The Semi is a lie. If it wasn't why haven't they started building them yet?

The Roadster as a hovercraft...absurdly fake.

The pickup truck's 300,000 lb towing capability, fakest of all.

FSD is dangerously fake.

Solar roof tile, fake.

Alien Dreadnaught, fake.


This is just Musk's style. He promises the coolest and most innovative products ever and people get excited cuz they are naive.

SpaceX's 60 satelites, fake.

SpaceX's Starship Hopper, fake.

SpaceX's 10 times launchable rocket, fake.

NeuralLink's cyborg tech, fake.

Boring Company's Prufrock supertunner, fake.


It is a post truth world we are living in. Non smart people on both sides of the spectrum worship their twitter leader, be it Trump or Musk. Meanwhile smart people can't really do anything or say anything that hasn't already been said to no avail. It's a world gone mad. I'm starting to think a BOE to wipe things clean might be overdue.

31

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 05, 2019, 02:33:19 PM »

Any company has liabilities like that. It's for tax reasons and whatnot.

Thanks for sharing this Sigmetnow.

GSY what do you say to that.

If you don't understand the difference between cash flow and liabilities...I have nothing to say.

Tax reasons and whatnot.

32

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 04, 2019, 03:34:50 PM »

Free Cash Flow is the most basic fundamental. Does the company create value, or destroy it?

Tesla's average quarterly free cash flow over the past 5 years: NEGATIVE $500M

You can't burn $2 billion a year and have strong fundamentals.


The only time Tesla has ever made a profit is in the quarter (or 2 quarters) following a new model release.

There are not really any new models in the pipeline either...

The Semi is a fake. It was announced over a year and a half ago, but nothing has happened. I think they were supposed to be in production already but there is no point in buying equipment to build something that won't work until battery tech improves A LOT.

The new Roadster isn't real either. At least not the hovercraft version. I am quite sure Tesla can make a very attractive and absurdly fast car and sell a few thousand for a quarter million dollars. But this cannot be scaled as is not really significant.

Finally, the Model Y. Which is really just a model 3 with a slightly sorta different shape. It is supposed to begin production in late 2020. Lets be kind and call it 2021.


By the time Tesla has anything new out (if that ever happens), there will be dozens of other similar offerings from competing companies. I doubt there is ever another profitable quarter. But even if the same pattern could continue uninterrupted...the loses drastically outweigh the profits.

Strong fundamentals? Give me a break.

33

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: June 04, 2019, 02:46:30 AM »

Tesla's fundamentals are solid.

There is no point to this conversation with opinions like this.

34

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 31, 2019, 05:56:00 PM »

ZERO.

Will you stop predicting Teslas fate if they sell one or more?

Should everyone who thought the $420 buyout was real never post again?

35

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 31, 2019, 02:10:34 AM »

Some believe Elon Musk (with a side of optimism), others feel he constantly lies. 

This is not up for debate. He lies constantly. If you genuinely challenge this fact, let me know and I will post dozens of major, significant, and obvious lies from the past year. No other public figure  challenges Musk in terms of # of major public lies (except maybe Trump).

36

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 31, 2019, 02:06:24 AM »

Do you expect any EV from any manufacturer to outsell Model 3 Standard in China in 2020?

I expect Tesla to sell ZERO new cars in China in 2020. ZERO.

37

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season

« on: May 31, 2019, 02:04:58 AM »

The movement throughout the Arctic Basin is incredible. The pack is far more mobile than it has ever been in May.

-The floe size in the Lincoln Sea has decreased a great deal in the last month and the Nares export looks set to continue strongly all season.

-Floe size also visibly decreasing with the ice just north of Severnaya Zemlya, which is experiencing a steady flow from the Laptev Sea west/southwest into the Atlantic through Kara, Barents, or Fram. There is a low preassure system entering the Arctic now that is going to supercharge this export.

-The Beaufort ice has not decreased in floe size but it is becoming increasingly mobile and in the next few days the open water in the Chukchi and Beaufort will merge.

In general, the arctic looks record slushy. And with all the recent insolation, I expect this to get significantly worse.

38

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 30, 2019, 03:31:22 AM »

In all honesty though, I'm going to try to be concise and straight forward. And I hope Lurk does the same. And Archimid and Sig (especially), PLEASE dont post endless charts of meaningless Tesla data.

We all actually want less emission but just disagree on the how.

Let's keep the thread clean with only stuff that is super germane to Tesla becoming a trillion dollar behemoth glory and ch. 7 liquidation shame.

The societal side is super important but lets respect Neven's more pressing role of moderating the more sciency side of this forum.

39

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 30, 2019, 03:10:49 AM »

Screw civility! The adults are gone. Let's tear this thing up!!!

40

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season

« on: May 30, 2019, 03:06:51 AM »

WOW, 20 km west move in the coastal Beaufort in 24 hrs. I thought there was some fast and strongish ice between the Beaufort and the Chukchi seas. But apparently the whole area is slush. June will be harsh.

41

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 29, 2019, 06:42:15 PM »

Putting together some recent news according to Tesla:

-Upgrades happening at Fremont to prepare for Model Y production. This is the reason for slowdown in production of other models.

-Model Y deliveries still more than a year away.

-Chinese factory almost complete.

-Chinese factory production in a few months tops.

So obviously none of that makes sense together. Nothing is happening for the Model Y, which should be obvious as Tesla hasn't yet ordered the equipment necessary. Thus the slowdown in production is due to lack of demand. Which makes perfect sense as to why Tesla continues to cut prices. There is no demand.

This should have been long expected. The car designs got stale. The company pulled back from CapEx for service and charging. Government incentives decreased. Musk's lying in the past year entered into the over-the-top and obvious. And, competition arrived... (which will only get much more intense in the coming year)

42

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 29, 2019, 06:29:41 PM »

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/tesla-fremont-factory-prepping-for-model-y-production-model-s-refresh.html

-Cutting X and S production. Cutting their prices too (as is the recent norm). And adding incentives.

-Model Y factory equipment not yet ordered.

By far the most interesting thing in the article is the apparent plan to offer a MORE minimalist interior on the theoretically upcoming refreshed Model S. This is interesting because there was already nothing in the interior. Maybe no airbags and/or seats. After all, FSD will be fully ready by the fall, so no safety features will be needed cuz computers are superior drivers.

43

Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company

« on: May 29, 2019, 05:17:50 PM »

Congratulations to The Boring Company for proving dedicated rights of way are important for speedy transportation, something transportation planners figured out roughly two centuries ago.

Right. The only contribution is extending dedicated rights of way lanes into the third dimension. Not revolutionary at all /s

You should look into buying the ground space between NYC and Beijing in a straight line, 14 feet wide. The shortest distance is a straight line, and one day this will be highly profitable ground space. Ignore the fact that digging holes is extremely capital intensive, because these costs will come down 10X in the next year, and 10X in the year after that, and then basically it will be free. Cuz iterations.

44

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 29, 2019, 05:08:57 PM »

Solar energy hasn't worked out as planned for Tesla, and the company needs to remove the distraction from the business.

This is incorrect. The Solar City acquisition worked out exactly as planned. The company was going bankrupt and that was going to hurt Musk's imagine and thus the ability for Tesla and SpaceX to raise money. Tesla bought SC to do a controlled demolition and prevent collateral damage to Musk's reputation.

45

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 29, 2019, 05:03:19 PM »

What technology? Genuinely curious what tech Tesla has that ppl think is valuable to other companies.

I refer this as evidence to Neven that some people do not know the superiority of Tesla EV, thus the Motor Trend article declaring Model 3 the best luxury sedan was on topic.

I refer this as evidence that no Bull can actually get technical and explain what "amazing proprietary tech" Tesla owns.

Tech is proprietary, and not always put into production.

So Tesla's tech is soooooo special, they aren't putting it in their cars. Right...

46

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 27, 2019, 07:01:58 PM »

It possibly gets bought out for a few dollars a share for the technology...

What technology? Genuinely curious what tech Tesla has that ppl think is valuable to other companies.

The tech question aside, I have to say that I think there is almost no chance of a low dollar buyout. The balance sheet is too upside down. The accounts payable is larger than combined accounts receivable and cash. There is $10B of bonds outstanding. And huge litigation risk and warranty liabilities. No one will want to take on the risk and debt to get to some theoretical tech (maybe it actually exist, but I don't know what it is). Any piece of the company of value will likely get bought on the super cheaper during auction.

47

Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company

« on: May 26, 2019, 03:43:10 PM »

If Musk can take Boring to where Space launches and electric mobility are today, the boring industry is in for a revolution

What exactly do you think that would look like?

48

Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company

« on: May 26, 2019, 03:41:51 PM »

There are some big advantages to reusable rockets, but there are some big downsides too. For the ups to outweigh the downs, the rocket has to be able to be reused many times. SpaceX thinks this number is 10.

Incorrect.  The Block 5 Falcon 9 being made now is built to be reusable about 10 times with minimal refurbishment — the goal for 2019 is to show a turnaround time of 24 hours — and about 100 times in all.

You seem to really struggle with the difference between hoping something will work, and something that has already worked. They are up to 3 so far. Simple fact. Not 10, not 100, 3.

49

Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company

« on: May 25, 2019, 05:47:32 PM »

Like for example, how electric vehicles are revolutionizing the car industry by providing more miles per energy spent and quicker vehicles or how self landing rockets is revolutionizing the space launch industry by decreasing cost.

Those things haven't actually happened yet. I understand that you think they are going to, but they haven't yet. It is important to see the difference.

Electric vehicles have been around for a long time. The range is limited due to energy density and so to make a car that people want to drive is very expensive. Musk addressed this by making his brand a status symbol so people would be will to pay for the expensive design. But their aren't enough people willing to pay enough for the status symbol, so the luxury brand is always losing money and thus will be short lived. That isn't revolutionary.

Landing rockets have been around for half a century. There are some big advantages to reusable rockets, but there are some big downsides too. For the ups to outweigh the downs, the rocket has to be able to be reused many times. SpaceX thinks this number is 10. And they talk about doing that. But they haven't yet. Not even close.

50

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure

« on: May 25, 2019, 05:38:27 PM »

It can be easy to get distracted on this thread by all the propaganda about software updates selling cars in norway or austria. Meanwhile the simple reality is that Tesla loses money rapidly and consistently.

Annual loses in Millions of US Dollars:

2015: 716
2016: 645
2017: 1606
2018: 252
2019: 479 (thru Q1; 1916 annualized)

Solar City was the same way:

2012: 91
2013: 149
2014: 335
2015: 648
2016: 594 (thru Q3; 792 annualized)


Talking about a Musk company and profitability just does not make sense. The private companies also bleed money. SpaceX, Boring, Neuralink.

Musk is a genius. Not for innovation anything, but for convincing other people to give him money so he can light it on fire. This is the problem with a fiat money system where "real" money can just be loaned into existence.